Unreal Engine 3 will power next-gen games for Apple's Mac OS X

Epic Games has released a new version of its Unreal Development Kit Beta that includes a preview of Mac OS X support for the toolset that will help power the next generation of Mac gaming.

The game developer announced the release of its September 2011 UDK Beta, the free edition of its Unreal Engine 3, earlier this week.

"The development process is virtually identical for games to be run on the Mac platform, but the packaging and deployment process does require some additional steps," the company wrote on its website.

Epic touted the dramatic increase to "every UDK game's potential user base" that will come as a result of the forthcoming Mac support. The latest beta is available at udk.com/download.

The new UDK Beta also includes multi-display support for iOS, via either HDMI cable or Apple's AirPlay standard. After seeing strong interest in its "Epic Citadel" tech demo, the developer released a version of the UDK adding support for iOS last year, with one executive for the company calling it Apple's mobile OS "the priority for now."

The finished product from the original iOS tech demo, "Infinity Blade," went on to become an instant hit, bringing in millions of dollars in revenue for the company. Former Apple CEO Steve Jobs has called the iOS version of the Unreal 3D environment "remarkable."

"Infinity Blade has been a runaway hit with customers around the world and we couldn't be more excited about our success on iOS devices," Epic Games vice president and co-founder Mark Rein said in July.

Apple is not going to start taking Mac gaming seriously until we stop calling 4+ year old technology "next generation" when it finally comes natively to OS X. The stakes aren't as high as when you couldn't Boot Camp, but it's pathetic that we still have to do this now that our hardware is comparable. Now, if only Apple would start using upgradeable GPU's in iMacs.

It's not necessarily as crazy as it sounds. Alienware has done it in laptops for years, and it's really the only component that seriously holds back the iMac as a serious gaming machine. Most people want their desktops to last for more than a few years, and it sucks when your brand new $1500 iMac comes with a last-generation graphics chip that you're stuck with for the life of the product.

I know I'm a pretty niche user, but I would love to not have to maintain a separate Windows tower for gaming.

Gaming will never be worth a crap on mac in comparison to windows. yeah we can get by wth sub par performance or games rnning great when the hardware way outclasses them. but coming to running optimal we'll always have to use windows. until apple takes opengl seriously and keeps it up to date, ati and nvidia provide newer graphics drivrs. and we don't get graphics card 1 year behind. ATI 7000 about to ship for PCs, and what's mac doing? waiting on 6000 series cards to hit mac pros.

Apple is not going to start taking Mac gaming seriously until we stop calling 4+ year old technology "next generation" when it finally comes natively to OS X. The stakes aren't as high as when you couldn't Boot Camp, but it's pathetic that we still have to do this now that our hardware is comparable. Now, if only Apple would start using upgradeable GPU's in iMacs.

The article says it will power the next generation of Mac games, it doesn't say the technology itself is next generation.

That said, it is. This is a BETA release for the UDK. What is being reported here is that, from the September release, the UDK will have Mac support, thereby bringing the Mac Unreal Engine up to the same modernity as the Windows one. From September onwards a developer will be able to create their game once and repackage it for both the Mac and the PC using the very latest build of the engine. The likes of Batman: Arkham City, Gears of War 3 and Mass Effect 3 will all use the Unreal Engine.

Gaming will never be worth a crap on mac in comparison to windows. yeah we can get by wth sub par performance or games rnning great when the hardware way outclasses them. but coming to running optimal we'll always have to use windows. until apple takes opengl seriously and keeps it up to date, ati and nvidia provide newer graphics drivrs. and we don't get graphics card 1 year behind. ATI 7000 about to ship for PCs, and what's mac doing? waiting on 6000 series cards to hit mac pros.

It'll never happen. There is less and less money in PC gaming. In many shops here in the UK the PC game section has been reduced to a token shelf in the corner. Consoles have won that battle. They're cheaper, more accessible, have more consistent hardware and require a fraction of the customer support as a result.

The 6 year old Xbox 360 and 5 year old PS3 still get prime billing when a new game comes out. Are PC versions of games really showing 6 years of advancement over consoles? Categorically, the answer is no. It's ever diminishing returns and who knows what the next generation of consoles will bring.

Yes there are hardcore gamers who'll always spend 2-3k on a new gaming PC, but they are ever more niche. iMacs just aren't aimed at that market and never will be. These goliath gaming PCs are becoming a little absurd outside of the professional gaming circuit.

Gaming will never be worth a crap on mac in comparison to windows. yeah we can get by wth sub par performance or games rnning great when the hardware way outclasses them. but coming to running optimal we'll always have to use windows. until apple takes opengl seriously and keeps it up to date, ati and nvidia provide newer graphics drivrs. and we don't get graphics card 1 year behind. ATI 7000 about to ship for PCs, and what's mac doing? waiting on 6000 series cards to hit mac pros.

ATi doesn't exist. The AMD Cores are considerably different than the traditional ATi cards before the merger.

It'll never happen. There is less and less money in PC gaming. In many shops here in the UK the PC game section has been reduced to a token shelf in the corner.

I think you're mistaking the move to digital distribution with a lack of money in PC gaming. Try telling Blizzard, Valve or Zynga that there's a lack of money in PC gaming. It's a market that's evolving and expanding.

The assumption here from many, and understandably so, is that the graphics hardware is always the sticking point. I wonder if a paradigm shift in the programming side may come in the near future that creates a quantum leap in performance without relying on ever more powerful hardware. It seems to me there has been this game of catch up for thirty years (no pun intended). Every computer I ever owned or tried out (and I owned a dealership so had access to anything, Mac or PC) was always just not quite powerful enough to get the best out of whatever latest game or flight sim software companies came out with unless you changed out the graphics system. Even then they never lived up to the promise and yet another graphics card would come out a few months later. I often wondered if the graphics card companies were actually colluding (and financially rewarding) with game card companies so between them they ensured no games would not reach their full potential thus spurring sales of ever faster graphics cards.

From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've owned them all.Long on AAPL so biased"Google doesn't sell you anything, Google just sells you!"

The assumption here from many, and understandably so, is that the graphics hardware is always the sticking point. I wonder if a paradigm shift in the programming side may come in the near future that creates a quantum leap in performance without relying on ever more powerful hardware. It seems to me there has been this game of catch up for thirty years (no pun intended). Every computer I ever owned or tried out (and I owned a dealership so had access to anything, Mac or PC) was always just not quite powerful enough to get the best out of whatever latest game or flight sim software companies came out with unless you changed out the graphics system. Even then they never lived up to the promise and yet another graphics card would come out a few months later. I often wondered if the graphics card companies were actually colluding (and financially rewarding) with game card companies so between them they ensured no games would not reach their full potential thus spurring sales of ever faster graphics cards.

of course they do. so does Intel with its CPU's. that is how they ensure their product lines stay relevant. If we could actually buy what Intel has "currently" designed but not yet released, we would not need to upgrade our machines for 10 more years.
Intel and AMD have technology designed today that probably will not be released until 2015!!

of course they do. so does Intel with its CPU's. that is how they ensure their product lines stay relevant. If we could actually buy what Intel has "currently" designed but not yet released, we would not need to upgrade our machines for 10 more years.
Intel and AMD have technology designed today that probably will not be released until 2015!!

My point was the software maybe deliberately crippled with that advance knowledge when it need not be. Not that the software is unable to perform fully. Perhaps all it would take is for a gaming company to program to give 100% with current technology. That might mean a company like Apple owning a really high end gaming company ... Now that would be sweet

From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've owned them all.Long on AAPL so biased"Google doesn't sell you anything, Google just sells you!"

Apple is not going to start taking Mac gaming seriously until we stop calling 4+ year old technology "next generation" when it finally comes natively to OS X. The stakes aren't as high as when you couldn't Boot Camp, but it's pathetic that we still have to do this now that our hardware is comparable. Now, if only Apple would start using upgradeable GPU's in iMacs.

The dark horse here is Unreal Engine 3 full-spec eventually coming to iPad and AppleTV. I just got my Xbox360, having gotten sick of the PC gaming scam. I won't go into my long tirade about PC gaming here.

But suffice to say experiencing the Xbox360 personally, it's nice and all that, but Apple could easily storm the console market with an iOS A6-powered chip. The A6 should be able to do PS3-level, Unreal Engine 3-esque graphics.

We're so close. Just an example. The PS3 unit is huge and has 5-year-old technology in it. The Xbox360 Slim is refined but the noise from playing a game from disc is horrendous. Installing to hard disk seems to be the only way to sanely enjoy a game. But the Xbox360 interface is quite smooth, gaming experience decent because it's a standardised platform.

Does the above look like something Apple could re-invent? Quite possibly.

But even if the AppleTV never becomes a gaming console, the iPad is so close to meeting "enthusiast" gamer demands. I'm playing Alan Wake now (soon, as soon as I get off this thread) and I would love to be able to hook my iPad up to the HDTV, play it a little, then unplug and take it on my travels... The ultimate game console should be both portable and HD-big-screen capable.

The dark horse here is Unreal Engine 3 full-spec eventually coming to iPad and AppleTV. I just got my Xbox360, having gotten sick of the PC gaming scam. I won't go into my long tirade about PC gaming here.

But suffice to say experiencing the Xbox360 personally, it's nice and all that, but Apple could easily storm the console market with an iOS A6-powered chip. The A6 should be able to do PS3-level, Unreal Engine 3-esque graphics.

We're so close. Just an example. The PS3 unit is huge and has 5-year-old technology in it. The Xbox360 Slim is refined but the noise from playing a game from disc is horrendous. Installing to hard disk seems to be the only way to sanely enjoy a game. But the Xbox360 interface is quite smooth, gaming experience decent because it's a standardised platform.

Does the above look like something Apple could re-invent? Quite possibly.

But even if the AppleTV never becomes a gaming console, the iPad is so close to meeting "enthusiast" gamer demands. I'm playing Alan Wake now (soon, as soon as I get off this thread) and I would love to be able to hook my iPad up to the HDTV, play it a little, then unplug and take it on my travels... The ultimate game console should be both portable and HD-big-screen capable.

I get why consoles are more popular, but I still prefer PC gaming. Until there is full mouse/keyboard support (or something as accurate), and modding available for consoles, I will stick to PC gaming. I played Fallout 3 on my PS3 and then bought it and FNV for the PC and there is no comparison just for the mods alone. Mac gaming, well I have been waiting for the Mac to catch up since playing Marathon. I am not holding my breath. Sigh...

I think you're mistaking the move to digital distribution with a lack of money in PC gaming. Try telling Blizzard, Valve or Zynga that there's a lack of money in PC gaming. It's a market that's evolving and expanding.

There is digital distribution on both the XBox and the PS3 yet they still have huge racks in the stores. Blizzard release a Starcraft every 12 years and their MMO arm is remarkable in the industry, not typical. Zynga primarily concentrate on web games from what I can see. It's not the hard PC development of the 90s is it? It's a market that is evolving yes, but not expanding.

Quote:

Originally Posted by digitalclips

The assumption here from many, and understandably so, is that the graphics hardware is always the sticking point. I wonder if a paradigm shift in the programming side may come in the near future that creates a quantum leap in performance without relying on ever more powerful hardware. It seems to me there has been this game of catch up for thirty years (no pun intended). Every computer I ever owned or tried out (and I owned a dealership so had access to anything, Mac or PC) was always just not quite powerful enough to get the best out of whatever latest game or flight sim software companies came out with unless you changed out the graphics system. Even then they never lived up to the promise and yet another graphics card would come out a few months later. I often wondered if the graphics card companies were actually colluding (and financially rewarding) with game card companies so between them they ensured no games would not reach their full potential thus spurring sales of ever faster graphics cards.

I have always been reminded of my old Spectrum and Amiga computers when playing modern PC games. They had a tiny fraction of the power that modern PCs have and yet they seemed to get more bang for their hardware buck. Civilization 5 is a good example of a modern game that is shamefully unoptimised. It takes a behemoth of a computer just to get a 3D map scrolling smoothly.

Despite this, I really don't think it's a conspiracy or a collusion between developers and graphics card manufacturers. I don't see how that would benefit the developers at all. They want their games to look as good as they can and the big production houses like EA and Bungie seem quite capable of optimising their titles.

The PC platform is just unsupervised that's all. Nobody truly knows what the current consumer hardware specs are at any given time. I also think PC gaming suffers from one of its strengths; the hardware is always cutting edge. That means developers have to create games for the hardware that will exist in 2-3 years time, not for the hardware in home PCs at the time they start development. It's guesswork and sometimes they get it wrong and leave us with a game we have to play on medium settings.

Consoles have their limitations, but they also don't suffer from these problems. They're a stable entity.

Quote:

Originally Posted by s4mb4

of course they do. so does Intel with its CPU's. that is how they ensure their product lines stay relevant. If we could actually buy what Intel has "currently" designed but not yet released, we would not need to upgrade our machines for 10 more years.
Intel and AMD have technology designed today that probably will not be released until 2015!!

I don't think this is true. They may have 2015 technology in the labs, but they can only release it when they can reach economy of scale. It would be silly of them to release a chip that is 20 times faster than the current generation when they have ones that are 2x and 4x faster to release first. That's why we need AMD to get their act together. That said, I think we're always pretty close to the state of the art with CPUs, perhaps that's naive.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nvidia2008

The dark horse here is Unreal Engine 3 full-spec eventually coming to iPad and AppleTV. I just got my Xbox360, having gotten sick of the PC gaming scam. I won't go into my long tirade about PC gaming here.

But suffice to say experiencing the Xbox360 personally, it's nice and all that, but Apple could easily storm the console market with an iOS A6-powered chip. The A6 should be able to do PS3-level, Unreal Engine 3-esque graphics.

We're so close. Just an example. The PS3 unit is huge and has 5-year-old technology in it. The Xbox360 Slim is refined but the noise from playing a game from disc is horrendous. Installing to hard disk seems to be the only way to sanely enjoy a game. But the Xbox360 interface is quite smooth, gaming experience decent because it's a standardised platform.

Does the above look like something Apple could re-invent? Quite possibly.

But even if the AppleTV never becomes a gaming console, the iPad is so close to meeting "enthusiast" gamer demands. I'm playing Alan Wake now (soon, as soon as I get off this thread) and I would love to be able to hook my iPad up to the HDTV, play it a little, then unplug and take it on my travels... The ultimate game console should be both portable and HD-big-screen capable.

I think you're right here. Apple could create huge waves with an AppleTV App Store. You have to think they have thought of it.

Mass Effect or Supreme Commander on an iPad...that would be gaming heaven.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pondosinatra

I see this as a good sign. Anything that helps keep gaming on the 'PC' I'm all for. Playing games on consoles is simply painful.

As an aside, I always liked Unreal more than Quake...

What is so painful about sitting in an armchair and not an office chair? I used to hate consoles too but when you give in to them and reap the benefits of rock solid performance and near zero maintenance you quickly learn to like them.

Is all the expense, patching, stress of network problems etc worth that 32x Antialiasing and a bit of added anisotropic filtering?

Aside from point and click games like Sup Com I don't think PC gaming has enough on balance to make it preferable to console gaming. Squeezing that 5% better graphics out of a title just isn't worth it. Save your cash

Quote:

Originally Posted by gwlaw99

I get why consoles are more popular, but I still prefer PC gaming. Until there is full mouse/keyboard support (or something as accurate), and modding available for consoles, I will stick to PC gaming. I played Fallout 3 on my PS3 and then bought it and FNV for the PC and there is no comparison just for the mods alone. Mac gaming, well I have been waiting for the Mac to catch up since playing Marathon. I am not holding my breath. Sigh...

Modding will always be better on PCs but I do think modding will also become more and more rare. It will be harder and harder to mod games as they become ever more sophisticated. Imagine what games will look like in 10 years. How do you mod that? They already have production teams that put most Hollywood blockbusters to shame.

I think the price of ever higher production values will be that we can't edit the titles as much. Hopefully, with bigger budgets and more knowhow going into the games, we won't have to as much!

I used to be a hardcore gamer as well -- religiously following hardware sites and specs, carefully picking and choosing components based on their performance for games, constantly upgrading, etc. So I _get_ all the beefs about Macs from that crowd.

However, you have to understand that:

1. It's a very niche group of people who do this. Even in the PC world, it's mostly small, niche retailers who sell gamer systems and components. Especially now that all-in-one PCs are much more popular than towers.

2. Apple will always choose proven, stable components and drivers over the latest and greatest bleeding edge stuff because technical support is directly provided by them. If you're a PC gamer custom building your own system, and something fails/doesn't work, you have to RMA the parts yourself/wait for newer drivers. That technical support system is significantly cheaper (and more time consuming) than Apple's.

3. There are still plenty of great games that work on last generation graphics cards and hardware. Believe it or not, there are people whose lives don't revolve around the latest announcements in the gaming industry and are willing to play whatever is available at a given time.

What is so painful about sitting in an armchair and not an office chair? I used to hate consoles too but when you give in to them and reap the benefits of rock solid performance and near zero maintenance you quickly learn to like them.

Is all the expense, patching, stress of network problems etc worth that 32x Antialiasing and a bit of added anisotropic filtering?...

It's the sh*tty controls! I tried Resident Evil on the Wii and one of the special Ops games on a PS3 - I wanted to smash my head against the wall it was so awkward. Give me a bloody keyboard and a mouse!

In addition with the second game it just looked slightly 'off' on the plasma I was playing it. I started to get a headache. It reminded me years ago of the first time I played Wolfenstein and the weird perspective would make me nauseous.

Apple is not going to start taking Mac gaming seriously until we stop calling 4+ year old technology "next generation" when it finally comes natively to OS X. The stakes aren't as high as when you couldn't Boot Camp, but it's pathetic that we still have to do this now that our hardware is comparable. Now, if only Apple would start using upgradeable GPU's in iMacs.

They wouldn't need to if game developers weren't as sloppy as they currently are.

None of the major games coming out today are really pushing the machines properly. They're using pre-rendered graphics over on the fly rendering which is the only reason you need powerful graphics cards. You may have heard of the first person shooter written in less than 96K? It does this because it creates the graphics on the fly.

Seriously, game developers are talentless hacks. They develop the same rehashed crap all for the sake of the almighty dollar. I'd love to see full blown games developed by coders. Then you'd see what can really be done with the current hardware.